Accidental Blogger

A general interest blog

  • The newly launched on line news site The Politico has conducted an interesting survey.  Current US senators were asked to respond to four questions about the Iraq war – then and now. The  questions are:

    • Did you vote to authorize the use of force against Iraq in 2002?
    • If you voted yes, do you regret your vote?
    • Do you support the "surge?"
    • Do you support a timetable / fixed date for withdrawal?

    The response of all one hundred senators is tabulated here.   

    An analysis of the answers reveals a lot about how the senators now feel about their original vote and what their calculations may be for the 2008 elections. Several hawkish Democrats who had supported Bush’s Iraq war policy in 2002, now regret having voted "yes." But not Hillary Clinton – she is playing a strange game, claiming to be "against" the war now but having "no regret" for enabling Bush in his immoral misadventures in 2002. Chris Bowers of Direct Democracy has analysed the votes of all 100 senators. This is what he says about the general mindset of US senators and Hillary Clinton in particular.

    This is quite a survey. It means, among other things, that there are still at least forty-seven votes to authorize the war in Iraq, even now (the thirty-eight who don’t regret their vote plus the nine Republicans new to Congress). It also means we are still nowhere near a majority for a timetable, with sixty-seven members opposing the idea (and, as I noted, many of the Democrats who oppose a timetable are from the progressive end of the spectrum).

    The biggest news, however, is that Hillary Clinton has just stated, flat-out, that she does not regret her war vote. At the same time, she is still trying to campaign as though she is against the war, claiming that she wouldn’t have started it, and that she would end it. Basically, it is the same thing we saw from Lieberman during the general election against Lamont: an absolute hawk trying to appear anti-war in order to pick up Democratic votes. Since most established news media outlets have basically become stenographers for campaign press releases, it might be very difficult to combat campaign rhetoric from someone who claims to be anti-war, but who doesn’t regret her vote to authorize the war in Iraq.

    So Hillary does not regret having aided and abetted what she herself wouldn’t have started and would now work to end. How are we to reconcile these contradictory claims? Does she realize that in her efforts to not appear "Kerryesque," she now seems grotesquely "Clintonesque" in her verbal acrobatics? This is not just having one’s cake and eating it, it is expecting voters to bake it for her and put a delectable icing on it! Or is she is asking us again to have sympathy for her – a smart but earnest woman who repeatedly gets duped by devious, two timing men?

    Many pundits have opined after the 2006 elections that given the untenable situation in Iraq and Bush-Cheney’s dogged incompetence, the 2008 presidential election is for the Democrats to lose.  With such glistening pearls of wisdom from the front runner, it seems that the Dems will manage the impossible again.

  • CotL # 32, the Valentine’s Day edition is up at The Greenbelt.  One of our own posts is featured in the Carnival.  Please check out what other liberal bloggers have to say.

  • A day late for Lincoln’s birthday, here are two photographs for you to compare, contrast and decide if the one on the right is young Abraham Lincoln sans his trademark beard.

    (Link: Sujatha)Lincolnc Lincolna2

  • 11lethal_2 The Iraq war’s tumultous aftermath has given rise to another unusual situation. The Bush administration, hardly the champion of human rights and compassion, is working hard to save Saddam Hussein’s former vice president Taha Yassin Ramadan from execution. Ramadan was first sentenced to life imprisonment by the Iraqi trial court. Subsequently the appeals court ruled that the punishment was too lenient for the ex-Baathist and sentenced him to die by hanging. George Bush now wants to spare his life.

    This is the same Bush during whose six year term as governor, Texas saw more than 150  executions! With customary arrogance Bush claimed that not a single innocent man or woman was wrongfully executed under his watch. In an interview with conservative reporter Tucker Carlson. he even mocked convicted killer Karla Fay Tucker’s pathetic plea for mercy by imitating her in a squeaky voice ("Please don’t kill me") ! Texas’ forensic labs have since then been found to be woefully lacking in care andcompetence. Several convictions of death row inmates have been overturned and mistrials declared on the basis of shoddy forensics and poor advocacy by public defenders. Aided by his current Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, who used to be his legal counsel, Bush turned down 99% of clemency requests as Texas governor.

    Bush’s callous disregard for human life has not abated during his presidency. Apart from the death and destruction he has unleashed in Iraq, his administration, ably aided by his loyal henchman Gonzales in the Justice Department, has pushed for death penalties for federal prisoners even in states that do not have capital punishment. Legal aid lawyers who argue against the death penalty have been threatened with funding cuts. Yet the same Bush administration has hired attorneys to argue against Taha Yassin Ramadan’s death penalty. Why the baffling change of heart? It appears that the Bushies are afraid of an embarrassing public fiasco akin to Saddam’s execution which shocked the civilized world and the gruesome garrotting death of his half brother as a result of hanging. Hence the opposition to the death penalty of Ramadan. It is a public relations matter and not because the milk of human kindness is suddenly  coursing through Bush’s hardened veins !

    U.S. officials are working to spare Saddam Hussein’s former vice president from a rapid trip to the Iraqi gallows, fearful that his execution, following the flawed hangings of Mr. Hussein and a co-defendant, could further damage the credibility of the American-backed government.

    The former vice president, Taha Yassin Ramadan, was among seven officials — including Mr. Hussein — convicted in November by the Iraqi High Tribunal, an Iraqi-run court established by the U.S. to try members of the ousted regime. The trial court imposed a life sentence, but an appeals court in December directed that Mr. Ramadan be executed.

    "We’ve had two botched executions," said a senior administration official in Washington. "We would like to prevent additional debacles."

    So, the prospect of a debacle is what is driving this uncharacteristic show of mercy by the US government – Iraqis can’t be trusted to competently execute prisoners. Does Bush believe that there are no botched executions in the US?  His own brother knows better. (See more details here about execution by lethal injection) The difference is that there are no cell phone videos of US prisoners dying painfully as there was of Saddam’s hanging.  CNN does not endlessly broadcast the death throes of prisoners strapped to the gurney. And what we don’t see, doesn’t amount to a debacle.

  • As an unapologetic cat lover, I have so far heroically resisted temptations to turn this site into a “kitty blog.” For example, I have not bombarded readers with pictures of my cats (except the one painting) nor endlessly described their unfailing cuteness. I find cats quite fascinating even when they are doing nothing, which is most of the time! But this cat video (not my cat) is too hilarious to ignore. (link via Confused)

  • Among the current Democratic presidential candidates, John Edwards appears to be the favorite with a large section of the liberal blogosphere. Edwards, who is running a populist campaign about the "Two Americas," posed on the front yard of a damaged New Orleans home to announce his candidacy. He is catching the usual right wing flak for his liberal message and his personal wealth. Now they have found a way to castigate his campaign for being against religion – through a couple of bloggers.
    Two liberal bloggers from Pandagon and Shakespeare’s Sister joined John Edwards’ presidential campaign and  have already run afoul of the candidate for their stance against religious conservatives. Holy cow!  Did they think that their irreverence towards religion was going to go unnoticed by either party? Forget the wrath and glee of the right wing wackos. Check out Edwards’ tepid respone in defense of his campaign volunteers.
    "The tone and the sentiment of some of Amanda Marcotte’s and Melissa McEwan’s posts personally offended me. It’s not how I talk to people, and it’s not how I expect the people who work for me to talk to people. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but that kind of intolerant language will not be permitted from anyone on my campaign, whether it’s intended as satire, humor, or anything else. But I also believe in giving everyone a fair shake. I’ve talked to Amanda and Melissa; they have both assured me that it was never their intention to malign anyone’s faith, and I take them at their word. We’re beginning a great debate about the future of our country, and we can’t let it be hijacked. It will take discipline, focus, and courage to build the America we believe in."
    Read Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwen’s responses here and the story in a Time Magazine article. Yes, Edwards is keeping the bloggers on his volunteer roll for now. But how much rope will he give these fiery ladies before he throws them off the bus for past indiscretions on their blogs? Not much I would guess. But how will blogging fans react, should Edwards chicken out? The last paragraph in the Time article reads:
    "If Edwards has got cold feet, Marcotte could be out of a job. Even if she survives, though, her supporters have made it clear that they have their own agenda. When she announced that she was moving to the Edwards campaign, hundreds of supporters wrote in to Pandagon to congratulate her. Buried in the pile of warm wishes, however, was a warning of sorts: "Congratulations," wrote a user named MAJeff, "and best of luck. Well, best of luck until we’ve decided you and your candidate are not pure enough for us and we all turn on you."
    Will anger in the blogosphere matter?  I am afraid not. Most Americans don’t read blogs and we have a one party system of government when it comes to war and religion
  • Came across this charming little travel tale (via Amardeep) in the New Yorker.  Polish travel writer Ryszard Kapuscinski reminisces about the first time he stepped out of his homeland and landed in … India (via a short stop in Rome).  The India he describes is of another era – from the 1950s.  Much has changed since then but a lot remains the same. What some of us can identify with in the essay is the author’s keen wander lust, tempered by caution. He just wanted to cross the border from Poland … and return home the same day! Not for him the distant and the unknown, not even Paris or London.

    "I rattled along from village to village, from town to town, in a hay cart or on a rickety bus—private cars were a rarity, and even a bicycle wasn’t easy to come by. My route sometimes took me to a village along the border. But it happened infrequently, for the closer one got to the border the emptier the land became, and the fewer people one encountered. The emptiness only increased the mystery of those regions, a mystery that attracted and fascinated me. I wondered what one might experience upon crossing the border. What would one feel? What would one think? Would it be a moment of great emotion, agitation, tension? What was it like, on the other side? It would, of course, be . . . different. But what did “different” mean? What did the other side look like? Did it resemble anything I knew? Was it inconceivable, unimaginable? My greatest desire, which gave me no peace, which tormented and tantalized me, was actually quite modest: I wanted only one thing—to cross the border. To cross it and then to come right back—that would be entirely sufficient, would satisfy my inexplicable yet acute hunger.

    But how to do this? None of my friends from school or university had ever been abroad. Anyone with a contact in another country generally preferred not to advertise it. I was sometimes angry with myself for my bizarre longing; still, it didn’t abate for a moment.

    One day, I encountered Irena Tarlowska, my editor-in-chief, in the hallway. She was a strapping, handsome woman with thick blond hair parted on one side. She said something about my recent stories, and then asked about my plans for the near future. I named the various villages I’d be visiting and the issues that awaited me there, and then mustered the courage to add, “One day, I would very much like to go abroad.”

    “Abroad?” she said, surprised and slightly frightened. “Where? What for?”

    “I was thinking about Czechoslovakia,” I answered. I wouldn’t have dared to say Paris or London, and, frankly, those cities didn’t interest me; I couldn’t even imagine them. This was only about crossing the border—it made no difference which one, because what was important was not the destination but the mystical and transcendent act."

    So naturally, it was a bit of a shock to his body and mind when Kapuscinski landed in India for his very first trip abroad. He was entranced and disoriented by the wholly alien sights, sounds and smells of India. Out of his desperation to find an anchor in reality in the unreal (for him) land, he focused on the language – not Hindi but English, as spoken in India. The author had only a rudimentary grasp of English.  His aids in this arduous undertaking was an English to Polish dictionary and Hemingway’s For Whom the Bell Tolls.

    "Cast into deep water, I didn’t want to drown. I realized that only language could save me. I began cramming words, night and day. I placed a cold towel on my temples, feeling as if my head were bursting. I was never without the Hemingway, but now I skipped the descriptive passages, which I couldn’t understand, and read the dialogue:

    I walked around the city, copying down signs, the names of goods in stores, words overheard at bus stops. In movie theatres, I scribbled blindly, in darkness, the words on the screen; I noted the slogans on banners carried by demonstrators in the streets. I approached India not through images, sounds, and smells but through words; and not the words of the indigenous Hindi but those of a foreign, imposed tongue, which by then had so fully taken root there that it was for me an indispensable key to the country."

    Kapuscinski’s encounter with India, where he traveled quite extensively, was so nerve racking that he considered the journey a failure. Yet, in all his bewilderment, he must have experienced moments of exhilaration and made connections to India at some deep level.  Upon returning to his familiar milieu in Poland, India would come back to him in flashes of "otherness" in which he would find unexpected comfort.

    "India was my first encounter with otherness, the discovery of a new world. It was at the same time a great lesson in humility. I returned from that journey embarrassed by my own ignorance. I realized then what seems obvious now: another culture would not reveal its mysteries to me at a mere wave of my hand. One has to prepare oneself thoroughly for such an encounter.

    My initial reaction to this lesson was to run home, to return to places I knew, to my own language, to the world of already familiar signs and symbols. I tried to forget India, which signified to me my failure: its enormousness and diversity, its poverty and riches, its incomprehensibility had crushed, stunned, and finally defeated me. Once again, I was glad to travel around Poland, to write about its people, to talk to them, to listen to what they had to say. We understood each other instantly, were united by common experience.

    But of course I remembered India. The more bitter the cold of the Polish winter, the more readily I thought of hot Kerala; the quicker darkness fell, the more vividly images of Kashmir’s dazzling sunrises resurfaced. The world was no longer uniformly cold and snowy but had multiplied, become variegated: it was simultaneously cold and hot, snowy white but also green and blooming."

     

  • In light of the recent UN resolution that "urges all member states ‘unreservedly to reject any denial of the Holocaust as a historical event, either in full or in part, or any activities to this end’"  and the German bid to make Holocaust denial a crime in all EU countries, Namit at Shunya’s Notes, asks some pertinent questions about what the Jewish Holocaust ought to mean to the rest of humanity.

  • I should have posted this earlier when I received the email from a friend.  Starting today, all cell phone numbers will be released to telemarketers and you will start receiving sales calls on your cell phone. To make your cell phone off limits to telemarketers, follow the instructions below. I registered my cell phone to block sales calls. It took about 30 seconds.

    All cell phone numbes are being released to telmarketing companies and you will start receiving sales calls.

    YOU WILL BE CHARGED FOR THE CALLS.

    To prevent this, call the following number from your CELL PHONE to get on the National DO NOT CALL list: 1-888-382-1222.

    It will only take about a minute to make the call and your cell phone will be blocked from receiving sales calls for five (5) years. Remember to call from the cell phone that you want blocked.